May 26, 2004


Oh, Really?

The Grey Lady's Mea Maxima (sorta) Culpa. They admit that they were not as ... professional in a Journalistic sense as they might have (should have) been. Really? I'm shocked. Check it out:

But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged — or failed to emerge.
...
...It is still possible that chemical or biological weapons will be unearthed in Iraq, but in this case it looks as if we, along with the administration, were taken in. And until now we have not reported that to our readers.
...
The informant also claimed that Iraq had sent unconventional weapons to Syria and had been cooperating with Al Qaeda — two claims that were then, and remain, highly controversial. But the tone of the article suggested that this Iraqi "scientist" — who in a later article described himself as an official of military intelligence — had provided the justification the Americans had been seeking for the invasion.
...
We consider the story of Iraq's weapons, and of the pattern of misinformation, to be unfinished business. And we fully intend to continue aggressive reporting aimed at setting the record straight.
"Aggressive Reporting"? Well, that's be a switch...will they start holding the 1600 Crew's feet to the fire when they make incredulous assertions? Will they begin to report on stories that are sitting right in front of them about the corruption of our national identity by the 1600 Crew?

When that starts happening, I might believe that they are serious about their contrition...until then, it looks like another smokescreen to buy time for their PR flackery for Fearless Leader to continue. Time to put up or shut up boys and girls. Until then it's: "All the Craven Apologies Fit to Utter"

posted by Jo Fish on 05.26.04 at 12:20 AM





Comments:

Not a frickin chance, While a few of the more sensible "journalists" around the dead tree industry are beginning to show some faint memory of once having had backbones, Corporate Media is still as frightened of these fascists as they have ever been. Of course, the fear is mainly instilled by financial worries since there are lots of deals pending before the FCC.

In a related issue, there have been some interesting reports of Media insiders dumping their stocks.

Such as the Sulzbergers, dumping a bunch of their shares in NY TImes stocks.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ir?s=nyt
(scroll down)

I guess they figure NYC property won't be so valuable after it's radioactive.

posted by: Lurch on 05.26.04 at 01:04 AM [permalink]



Wow Lurch. if you've got some good stock tracking software please keep a look for insurance, banking underwriters who may well undergo unseasonable trade swings.

There will be a money trail wherever the next vacation culminates. Not just airlines, chem facilites perhaps or air mail delivery systems (fed ex. competitor for example).

Have the feeling Richard Clarke's consulting firm has good inroads on such.He'll keep an eye on stuff for certain.

Have the feeling the enxt attack will be close enough to scare us. Another haiti incident, puerto, or the mexico area especially any oil refinieries since there were 7 fires here including the pipeline to airport at Alaska that's a major jet center. Sent a message to Clark's Q&A asking him to get an assesssment of the Alaska pieline a fire went down there from the BushSr/Clinton transition that may have well been the AQ network since they are leveraged by Saudis...

I knew of three of the refinery fires and 2 chemical firms including one in this town. Think that would be more of the McVeigh profiles and heaven forbid Bashcroft go profile the fundies he got enough people mad over gunshows. Good way to build stockpiles if you claim the other unaccounted for/fire damaged...

They gotta pucker up for the base votes...and the Crawford ignore status may well be underway since polls are so bad.

posted by: Mr.Murder on 05.26.04 at 03:20 AM [permalink]



Why doesn't the NYT spell out all of the details that its reporters relied upon, including sources, so that readers can judge their professionalism? Might such a story read like a fairy tale? Might it serve as a lesson for future stories from its reporters? Back to Journalism 101 basics, please.

By the way, doesn't this selling by insiders demonstrate that when newspapers go public with their stock, potential conflicts of interest arise vis-a-vis their readers? Profits before the truth?

posted by: Shag from Brookline on 05.26.04 at 06:38 AM [permalink]



Lonely and slightly confused Right Winger seeks intelligent but gentle Left Winger for meaningful discussion of today’s issues. Show me the error of my ways, PLEASE.


http://pep.typepad.com/

posted by: Adrian Spidle on 05.26.04 at 11:34 AM [permalink]



a drunken retard for a president, and the times admits they don't know shit about journalism. nowhere to go but up, i hope.

posted by: on 05.26.04 at 07:20 PM [permalink]



Chemical Weapons may be unearthed? They were sure to cause damage there...

Israel can loan some baby bulldozers from their 'palestine parking lot' project and perhaps bury/unberay some regular garbage cans and claimit for terror...

posted by: Mr.Murder on 05.30.04 at 03:29 AM [permalink]



typos oops

posted by: Mr.Murder on 05.30.04 at 03:30 AM [permalink]






Post a Comment:

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?



















usdemvet -at- hotmail.com
or
usndemvet -at- usdemvet.com (coming soon)






All the original material © 2002-2003 Jo Fish
steal what you want, all I ask is an attribution of some sort
Thanks